Re: Database versus filesystem for storing images

From: Jorge Godoy <jgodoy(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: John McCawley <nospam(at)hardgeus(dot)com>
Cc: Jorge Godoy <jgodoy(at)gmail(dot)com>, Clodoaldo <clodoaldo(dot)pinto(dot)neto(at)gmail(dot)com>, imageguy <imageguy1206(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Database versus filesystem for storing images
Date: 2007-01-05 21:20:31
Message-ID: 87irfli31c.fsf@gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

John McCawley <nospam(at)hardgeus(dot)com> writes:

> This is a web app, so in my example all of the images live on a web server,
> and our data lives on a separate database server. We have a completely
> duplicated setup offsite, and mirror images of every server at the backup
> site. Every night we use rsync to duplicate everything offsite. Also, a cron
> job pg_dumps every night and copies the dump over to the backup DB server.
>
> And before anybody gives me any guff, our office is in New Orleans, and we
> went through Katrina with less than an hour of downtime, and without losing
> anything. So there ;)

Anyway, you have no guarantee that all your images exist on file and that all
existing files have a corresponding entry in your database.

--
Jorge Godoy <jgodoy(at)gmail(dot)com>

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jorge Godoy 2007-01-05 21:25:20 Re: Database versus filesystem for storing images
Previous Message Gavin Hamill 2007-01-05 21:14:55 Re: vacuum v. vacuumdb